Call for Judgment

Sorry to be Calling for Judgment so much, but there's a problem. "Law and the Mob Proposals" says that all Proposals are either Law Proposals, Mob Proposals, or Universal Proposals. Strictly speaking, that doesn't mean that a Proposal can't be more than one of those at once -- and indeed, we have two Proposals pending which label themselves both [Law] and [Mob]. Not a big problem by itself, but "Law and Mob Proposals" also says:

DEFERENTIAL votes on a Mob proposal are treated as the same as the Don's vote, instead of The Man's. If the Don has not yet cast a vote on a Mob proposal, DEFERENTIAL votes are ignored.

Since the [Law]/[Mob] Proposals are, among other things, Mob Proposals, that means all the numerous Deferential votes in them go to the Don, not the Man. I don't think that's what we want, and I don't think that [Law]/[Mob] Proposals are meaningful now that we have the Universal type. Therefore, I suggest that we:
A) Clarify the relevant paragraph of "Law and Mob Proposals" to make it read: "...all Proposals are either Law Proposals, Mob Proposals, or Universal Proposals, but not more than one", AND
B) Treat all currently pending Proposals that claim to be more than one Proposal as Universal Proposals.